Following recent developments in New York, which recently passed a controversial sales tax that Amazon feels unfairly targeted by – some state officials nicknamed it the “Amazon Tax” – the Texas Comptroller’s office decided to open an investigation into Amazon’s Irving fulfillment facility, after being contacted by a reporter from the Dallas Morning News with questions regarding the company’s tax payments.

Amazon says that state officials are fully aware of the facility and its operations, and that it does not have to pay sales taxes because it operates the fulfillment center under Amazon subsidiary “Amazon.com.kydc, Inc.”

Complicating matters are the fulfillment center’s records filed with the state, which in 2006 and 2007 listed “Amazon.com” as the owner instead of its “kydc” subsidiary. Such a mistake, if it was one, would force the company to be liable for millions in back sales taxes over the past four years, which the Comptroller’s office fully intends to collect. The current sales tax rate in Texas is 6.25%.

Currently, internet retailers are only entitled to collect sales tax from customers residing in a state that the company has a significant presence in. While out-of-state customers are still obligated to pay “use tax” for out of state purchases, actual consumption is untracked and, consequently, most consumers choose not to pay it. Both United States federal and state governments have made it clear that they intend to change this system: several states, like New York, are gunning for ways to enforce use taxes, and the IRS last week made it clear that it wants to tax transactions through user-to-user sites like eBay and Craigslist.

Nonetheless, the Texas Comptroller’s Office says it will continue its investigation, and does not know when it will complete.

“We continue to interact with and cooperate with local and state Texas tax officials at many levels,” said Smith. “The state of Texas is fully aware of Amazon.com’s subsidiaries’ Texas operations.”

Comments

Threshold

Username

Password

remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

I think I see where you're coming from here, but I respectfully take issue. I may be over-sensitive, but that statement has a bit of a paternalistic ring to it.

While it may be a worthy intention, there has nevery really been a government that works for it's citizen's best interest. The US government was sent up to simply be a referee, not a parent.

Our founders had enough foresight to construct a framework (the constitution and bill of rights) whose sole purpose is to protect individuals from government. In essence, our founders believed that government is inherently bad... that concentration of power always leads to corruption, and that we must be diligent to guard against this.

I believe it folly to ever think that anyone else has your best interests in mind (except maybe my mom - she's a jewel).

quote: Our founders had enough foresight to construct a framework (the constitution and bill of rights) whose sole purpose is to protect individuals from government. In essence, our founders believed that government is inherently bad... that concentration of power always leads to corruption, and that we must be diligent to guard against this.

Hence the 2nd ammendment, or as some of my friends call it "the reset switch".